build a new pc specifically for x265 encoding

[usually_quiet]

Oh, forgot to mention, I also have usb dvd drives for loading software.

Just so you know, you may encounter a technical difficulty when installing Windows 7 on a Skylake system. Skylake needs xHCI drivers for USB, which means USB won't work during installation because Windows 7 installation media does not include xHCI drivers.

One work-around is to use a PS/2 keyboard and mouse, plus an optical drive connected via SATA, instead of a USB drive of some sort. I think there are probably some other work-arounds, but someone who has installed Windows 7 on a Skylake system may know more about them.

[SameSelf]

More threads may even decrease quality to some extent. Also, the 6700K has a higher clock than any of those 6+ core CPUs have

Not sure what you mean by this. When it comes to cpu encoding, number of physical cores rules. End of story. Just take a look at this chart. Even the five-year old 3960X beats out the 6700K. The rest of the Extreme skus literally rank out by physical core. Also, I missed it initially, but this chart shows that the 6700K only has a 13% increase in fps over the 6600K. I am not sure how these benchmarks hold up for HD video using x265.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10337/the-intel-broadwell-e-review-core-i7-6950x-6900k-6...-to-10-cores/6

[sneaker]

Just take a look at this chart. Even the five-year old 3960X beats out the 6700K.

By 3.2% at some 300% the cost (money) plus some slight loss of compression due to the more threads. And when you run into a less well multi-threaded scenario the i6700K will pull ahead.

but this chart shows that the 6700K only has a 13% increase in fps over the 6600K.

1.47 fps to 1.87 fps is 27% increase. That's a bigger difference than between the i7-6700K and any 6 core. But you are correct, it is not faster than all the 6 cores. I was too optimistic. Bang for buck is a another question. I was unaware of the i7-6850K, it's far below $1000 and 17% faster than i7-6700K.

[vhelp]

I just checked my Dell Inspiron laptop's cpu, an Intel i3-2370M, 2 cores (4 threads) and it supports Quicksync!!!

So, out of curiosity, I would like to test run quicksync. Does anyone know how do I go about it ?

I can re-run the Batman trailer on it. Thanks.

Performance: 
------------------------
# of Cores                         2 
# of Threads                       4 
Processor Base Frequency           2.40 GHz 
Cache                              3 MB smartcache
                                   
                                   
Graphics Specifications: 
------------------------
Processor Graphics                 Intel® HD Graphics 3000 
Graphics Base Frequency            650.00 MHz 
Graphics Max Dynamic Frequency     1.15 GHz 
Graphics Output                    eDP/DP/HDMI/SDVO/CRT 
Intel® Quick Sync Video            Yes 
Intel® InTru™ 3D Technology        Yes 
Intel® Wireless Display            Yes 
Intel® Flexible Display Interface (Intel® FDI)  Yes 
Intel® Clear Video HD Technology   Yes 
Macrovision* License Required      No 
# of Displays Supported            2 
                                   
                                   
Advanced Tech: 
--------------------------
Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology  Yes 
Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology  Yes

[sneaker]

Having Quicksync doesn't mean it can encode HEVC/H.265. The generation is important and yours is too old. HEVC encoding was introduced with Skylake. (Kaby Lake will bring HEVC 10 bit encoding) I think this was mentioned earlier in this thread.

[vhelp]

ah, shucks-darn!

[jagabo]

ah, shucks-darn!

You can still play with QuickSync h.264 encoding. It should be faster than your CPU. Handbrake and QSVEnc both support it. But that generation of QS delivered lower quality (at equivalent bitrates) than x264 at the veryfast preset.

[vhelp]

RE: Intel's Quicksyn for AVC/h264

Now, i'm not even sure i'm using the correct tool or latest version for that matter, but well, i'm impressed!

I ran the same clip (posted in my first post on page 1 here in this discussion) and the speed difference was amazing and filezie was smaller than my x265 encodes to hevc. Plus, the quality was quite good compared to my x264 encodes to AVC done in the past. My x264 fps for ultrafast was 4 fps for 720x480. Quicksync AVC was over a 130 fps. My hevc (from page 1 of this discussion) was about 35 MB in size versus 26 MB in quickcy avc (below).

I don't know if there is anything else I can do or add to the script (below) for quicksync avc, but if there is anything I can do to fine-tune the quality even further, i'd be happy to hear them and try'em out.

Here is the generated results of the encode by intel's quicksync avc on this dell inspiron laptop, Core i3-2370M cpu 2.40GHz which ran in 30 seconds, I think.

c:\tools\Quicksync\qsvencc --quality higher -i "c:\tools\movie.avs" -o "c:\cap\quicksync_firsttestencode.264"

QSVEnc 1.19 (x86), based on Intel(R) Media SDK Encoding Sample 5,0,337,0
CPU Info Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-2370M CPU @ 2.40GHz (2C/4T)
Media SDK impl QuickSyncVideo (hardware encoder), API v1.3
Input Frame Info Avisynth 2.60 (yv12) -> nv12, 720x480, 24000/1001 fps
Output Video H.264/AVC High @ Level 3
720x480p 1:1 23.976fps (24000/1001fps)
Encode Mode Constant QP (CQP)
CQP Value I:24 P:26 B:27
Target usage 2 - higher
Ref frames 2 frames
Bframe Settings 3 frames
Max GOP Length 240 frames
Scene Change Detection on
Slices 1
Memory type d3d9
Input Buffer Size 3 frames
Intel iGPU ID 1st GPU

Processing started
[ 4.1%] 154 frames: 130.51 fps, 1302.63 kb/s, remain 0:00:27
[ 9.0%] 338 frames: 169.85 fps, 1132.80 kb/s, remain 0:00:20
[13.9%] 520 frames: 185.71 fps, 1279.32 kb/s, remain 0:00:17
[18.7%] 701 frames: 194.18 fps, 1377.72 kb/s, remain 0:00:16
[23.6%] 883 frames: 199.77 fps, 1490.87 kb/s, remain 0:00:14
[28.3%] 1058 frames: 202.29 fps, 1571.01 kb/s, remain 0:00:13
[33.1%] 1240 frames: 205.30 fps, 1508.18 kb/s, remain 0:00:12
[37.9%] 1417 frames: 206.86 fps, 1526.53 kb/s, remain 0:00:11
[42.3%] 1583 frames: 205.05 fps, 1469.15 kb/s, remain 0:00:11
[46.5%] 1741 frames: 204.10 fps, 1435.19 kb/s, remain 0:00:10
[51.2%] 1914 frames: 204.93 fps, 1410.31 kb/s, remain 0:00:09
[56.0%] 2094 frames: 206.31 fps, 1446.05 kb/s, remain 0:00:08
[60.7%] 2269 frames: 207.03 fps, 1477.06 kb/s, remain 0:00:07
[65.1%] 2434 frames: 206.80 fps, 1480.82 kb/s, remain 0:00:06
[69.9%] 2615 frames: 207.87 fps, 1472.50 kb/s, remain 0:00:05
[75.0%] 2805 frames: 209.48 fps, 1434.06 kb/s, remain 0:00:04
[79.8%] 2984 frames: 210.14 fps, 1400.71 kb/s, remain 0:00:04
[84.7%] 3169 frames: 211.13 fps, 1393.06 kb/s, remain 0:00:03
[89.3%] 3340 frames: 211.13 fps, 1389.75 kb/s, remain 0:00:02
[93.4%] 3494 frames: 210.10 fps, 1389.39 kb/s, remain 0:00:01
[98.4%] 3682 frames: 211.12 fps, 1382.94 kb/s, remain 0:00:00

encoded 3741 frames, 211.60 fps, 1374.11 kbps, 25.56 MB
encode time 0:00:18

frame type IDR 45
frame type I 45, total size 0.95 MB
frame type P 942, total size 8.88 MB
frame type B 2754, total size 15.72 MB

Processing finished

[sneaker]

My x264 fps for ultrafast was 4 fps for 720x480.

I get 400 fps with those settings on a half-decade old i5. Just saying...

[vhelp]

I get 400 fps with those settings on a half-decade old i5. Just saying...

Well, that figure is from my desktop pc, an amd dual-core on xp home. Actually, I think that speed was around 8 fps using ultrfast.

ok, just did another QS encode on a 31 minute clip, (vhs source, like the previous one) and it took 11 minutes to complete, because this time, instead of using my usual

separateFields().selectevery( 05, 0,1,2,3).weave( )

this time, i used TFM

trim( 72673,0 ).tfm(order=-1).tdecimate().trim(0,45672)

on a given range of frames. TFM really kills the speed. I don't know how to make it faster, if it can be. I only just recently discovered it in a post from manono, and i just copied what he used and tested on some vhs clip that bob up and down once in a while during a capture session (which breaks the telecine) and TFM (the above snippet) works perfectly to restore the telecine. Anyway. QS is still way faster even on this i3 laptop versus x264 though I have not ever used x264 on this laptop. I'm sure i can't get your 400 fps w/ x264. Anyway. Just saying, too

[jagabo]

On my quad core i5 2500K I get about 500 fps with DVD sources and x264 at the ultrafast preset. That's with a simple AviSynth script that looks like:

Mpeg2Source("VTS_02_1.d2v")

Adding TFM(order=-1) and TDecimate() reduces that to about 200 fps. QSVEnc with "--quality best" runs about the same speed in both cases.

[SameSelf]

1.47 fps to 1.87 fps is 27% increase. That's a bigger difference than between the i7-6700K and any 6 core. But you are correct, it is not faster than all the 6 cores. I was too optimistic. Bang for buck is a another question. I was unaware of the i7-6850K, it's far below $1000 and 17% faster than i7-6700K.

Doh! My eyes betrayed me and you are correct! A 27% increase which holds up pretty well from x264. So I guess we can state that hyperthreading offers a roughly 30% increase. I think it is also worth stating that x265 is still under development. It would be interesting to see if they squeeze more MT optimizations out of it.

[sneaker]

A 27% increase which holds up pretty well from x264. So I guess we can state that hyperthreading offers a roughly 30% increase.

Don't forget the i7-6700K is higher clocked than the i5-6600K (and has more cache). The difference not completely because of hyper-threading.

[vhelp]

I'm still researching the best solution. Mainly because my c.card got shredded and I have to wait 3 weeks for a new card and also because I really want something very small. very small. Finding a "skylake" equipped cpu is not always easy since the online stores don't know what quicksync and hevc is. Anyway. I have found that there are mini pc's floating around and I've been researching them. But the price is pretty high. I found this one here, but the price is still too high and I only need win7 home, not pro. see link below.

So, it looks like I also need to add "Turbo Boost" and "hyper thread" features if I want to get as much speed out of the cpu as possible. I want to be able to test both quicksync for hevc and x265.exe for both quality picture and speed of encoding and processing before I finalize on a final distribution archive.

(these are processors that I want, that have the branded family name, "Skylake" with Quicksync encoder for MPEG2/AVC/HEVC)

But I'm still hung up on the differences between an i3 vs i5 vs i7 and their respective threads, since they can all have:

group A) (dual-core/2-threads, 2-cores/2-threads, 4-cores/4-threads)
group B) (dual-core/2-threads, 2-cores/4-threads, 4-cores/8-threads)

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M5AQ1II/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=
* this is the processor specs, in case anyone wants to review it --> http://ark.intel.com/products/88179/Intel-Pentium-Processor-G4400-3M-Cache-3_30-GHz
* but it has group B specs.

I mean, don't I want group B processors ? or is there more to it. This is probably going to be my last purchase in a long while to come, so I want to get the best I can get, now. Thanks.

[sneaker]

Pentium G4400: only 2 cores, no AVX, no AVX2, no hyper-threading
It will not be good for x265.

[jagabo]

There's no hard and fast rule when it comes to what constitutes an i3, i5, or i7, it's just marketing speak on the part of Intel. Look at the specs of the CPUs. Turbo Boost doesn't help with video encoding because it's only active when few cores are being used. 4 cores is faster than 2 cores+multithreading (everything else being equal).

[sneaker]

Turbo Boost doesn't help with video encoding because it's only active when few cores are being used.

This isn't always true. Turbo Boost is dynamic and can be active even with all cores under load. Granted, not as high as under single core usage. AVX2 load or heat may also reduce boost (and x265 uses AVX2 heavily). The specifics depend on the CPU model.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/processors/000005647.html

[ezcapper]

I'm still researching the best solution. Mainly because my c.card got shredded and I have to wait 3 weeks for a new card and also because I really want something very small. very small. Finding a "skylake" equipped cpu is not always easy since the online stores don't know what quicksync and hevc is. Anyway. I have found that there are mini pc's floating around and I've been researching them. But the price is pretty high. I found this one here, but the price is still too high and I only need win7 home, not pro. see link below.

So, it looks like I also need to add "Turbo Boost" and "hyper thread" features if I want to get as much speed out of the cpu as possible. I want to be able to test both quicksync for hevc and x265.exe for both quality picture and speed of encoding and processing before I finalize on a final distribution archive.

(these are processors that I want, that have the branded family name, "Skylake" with Quicksync encoder for MPEG2/AVC/HEVC)

But I'm still hung up on the differences between an i3 vs i5 vs i7 and their respective threads, since they can all have:

group A) (dual-core/2-threads, 2-cores/2-threads, 4-cores/4-threads)
group B) (dual-core/2-threads, 2-cores/4-threads, 4-cores/8-threads)

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M5AQ1II/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=
* this is the processor specs, in case anyone wants to review it --> http://ark.intel.com/products/88179/Intel-Pentium-Processor-G4400-3M-Cache-3_30-GHz
* but it has group B specs.

I mean, don't I want group B processors ? or is there more to it. This is probably going to be my last purchase in a long while to come, so I want to get the best I can get, now. Thanks.

Skylake quicksync is not good, it uses some cpu as well and mediocre quality. The kaby lake quicksync/hd graphics 620 in the mis cubi 2 will be better, cheaper and faster if you get the i3-7100u one. It will not tax the cpu.

[usually_quiet]

I'm still researching the best solution. Mainly because my c.card got shredded and I have to wait 3 weeks for a new card and also because I really want something very small. very small. Finding a "skylake" equipped cpu is not always easy since the online stores don't know what quicksync and hevc is. Anyway. I have found that there are mini pc's floating around and I've been researching them. But the price is pretty high. I found this one here, but the price is still too high and I only need win7 home, not pro. see link below.

I have spent a lot of time looking at mini PCs, both pre-built and components over the past couple of years. I toyed with the idea of using one for an HTPC for a while.

In general, very small PCs like the one in your link have no case fans for ventilation and the CPUs rely on either small low profile coolers with fans or passive cooling for temperature control. That makes them prone to overheating under sustained loads, particularly when something other than a very low TDP mobile CPU installed. Yes, they are very attractive for some uses (HTPC or light office work) but video encoding for hours at a time is not one of them. You want to do more than play with HEVC encoding using QuickSync right?

[vhelp]

Yes. Good point. I didn't think about the potential for over heating in strenuous conditions like video encode through software.

[usually_quiet]

Yes. Good point. I didn't think about the potential for over heating in strenuous conditions like video encode through software.

Maybe you should just save up some money for a while if you don't have enough spare cash to really build what you need. I'll be doing that myself because I need to update my HTPC. It will be 8 years old next year.

If you are still considering a more capable Kaby Lake system, the desktop CPUs probably won't arrive until late this year or early next year.

Microsoft was very clear that they would provide no updates to Windows 7 or Windows 8.1 for Kaby Lake, and Intel agreed not to support the use of any OS but Windows 10 for Kaby Lake. While Skylake and Kaby Lake are similar, they are not identical. It would be good to know whether or not using Kaby Lake with Windows 7 and a motherboard with a 100 series chipset causes any problems. I have been trying to find out, but have found no reports at all, either good news or bad. More time might help there too.

[ezcapper]

As long as your processor tdp is no more than 15 w, overheating will not be an issue. That is what you want to check. Especially if you are not taxing cpu while encoding

[KarMa]

Microsoft was very clear that they would provide no updates to Windows 7 or Windows 8.1 for Kaby Lake, and Intel agreed not to support the use of any OS but Windows 10 for Kaby Lake. While Skylake and Kaby Lake are similar, they are not identical. It would be good to know whether or not using Kaby Lake with Windows 7 and a motherboard with a 100 series chipset causes any problems. I have been trying to find out, but have found no reports at all, either good news or bad. More time might help there too.

Yeah this issue is a bit up in the air. As I've heard that newer processor will probably still work on Windows 7. But hotfixes or optimizations on Windows 7 may be hard or impossible to get. Certainly won't be provided by Microsoft, along with Intel and AMD agreeing not to support it (at least officially).

I would not recommend buying an unsupported CPU for Windows 7 until other people on other tech forums have tested it out. And even then you are still taking a risk.

[usually_quiet]

As long as your processor tdp is no more than 15 w, overheating will not be an issue. That is what you want to check. Especially if you are not taxing cpu while encoding

Remember vhelp wants to use his new PC for CPU based encoding too. I'm guessing the number of frames per second someone gets when using x265 or x264 and not Quick Sync with that kind of low TDP CPU isn't very impressive.

[jagabo]

As long as your processor tdp is no more than 15 w, overheating will not be an issue. That is what you want to check. Especially if you are not taxing cpu while encoding

Remember vhelp wants to use his new PC for CPU based encoding too. I'm guessing the number of frames per second someone gets when using x265 or x264 and not Quick Sync with that kind of low TDP CPU isn't very impressive.

x264 at the ultrafast preset on my 6 watt TDP Celeron N3150 (quad core, 1.6 GHz base) encodes 720x480 DVD video with TFM().TDecimate() at about 80 fps. QSVEnc at the "best" preset runs about 80 fps too. Compare that to 200 fps (x264 and QSVEnc) on my I5 2500K in post #41 above.

[vhelp]

As it turns out, my work pc cpu is based on the Skylate processor. Its an Dell desktop i7-6700 @ 3.40GHz 4GB ram. All criteria's in that link are "Yes". its seems like a perfect cpu. But what do I know. It did pretty well as I tested it this afternoon. (see below)

http://ark.intel.com/products/88196/Intel-Core-i7-6700-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_00-GHz

I wanted to test this baby out, and after struggling with getting the necessary: apps, codecs, and trial-by-error strip-down avisynth working, I was finally able to run some tests. You know these work computers are locked down and prohibit installing other software.

I created a working memory stick with all the necessary files to run:

Quicksync (mpeg2, avc, and hevc) - i ran tests on all. the mpeg2 was the worse quality. There is nothing one can do to make a high quality video from it. There is pixelation throughout the whole video, from top to bottom in each of the frames. Horrible.. Just horrible. I don't know why Intel added the mpeg2 encoder in there when it is pure crap. H264/AVC and HEVC on the other hand are much better quality videos. Anyway.

It was late in the day when i finally got things going so i had to wing things a bit, as i was rushing out the door to go home. I will probably do a better test run tomorrow, now that I have things working. I have a bunch of specs and clipboard copies of some of the results. May or may not post those. I will check them when I get home.

The one thing that bothered me most is the video display on my dell laptop. Its horrible. All the colors are washed out when I view a video, whether in virtualdub, ffplay, or MPC-HC. I can't seem to figure out how to match it to my desktop pc, work or home. Maybe someone know something about this and can help? Anyway. I gotta get out of here and get some dinner. Its deli night.

[jagabo]

The one thing that bothered me most is the video display on my dell laptop. Its horrible. All the colors are washed out when I view a video, whether in virtualdub, ffplay, or MPC-HC.

In VirtualDub go to Options -> Preferences -> Display and disable everything there. Press Save. Exit and restart VirtualDub. Open a video. Do you still have washed out colors?

Or in VLC set Tools -> Preferences -> Video -> Output -> Windows GDI Video Output. Exit and restart VLC. Colors still washed out?

If colors look ok with those settings you just need to adjust your graphics card's video proc amp settings.

[El Heggunte]

The one thing that bothered me most is the video display on my dell laptop. Its horrible. All the colors are washed out when I view a video, whether in virtualdub, ffplay, or MPC-HC. I can't seem to figure out how to match it to my desktop pc, work or home.

How old is your Dell laptop? Are you sure that its monitor is not a 6-bit device?

[vhelp]

edit: I moved the conversation pieces about my monitor isues over here:

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/374734-Color-Levels-Question?p=2463439&viewfull=1#post2463439

[usually_quiet]

As it turns out, my work pc cpu is based on the Skylate processor. Its an Dell desktop i7-6700K @ 3.40GHz 4GB ram. All criteria's in that link are "Yes". its seems like a perfect cpu. But what do I know. It did pretty well as I tested it this afternoon. (see below)

http://ark.intel.com/products/88196/Intel-Core-i7-6700-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_00-GHz

I wanted to test this baby out, and after struggling with getting the necessary: apps, codecs, and trial-by-error strip-down avisynth working, I was finally able to run some tests. You know these work computers are locked down and prohibit installing other software.

I created a working memory stick with all the necessary files to run:

Quicksync (mpeg2, avc, and hevc) - i ran tests on all. the mpeg2 was the worse quality. There is nothing one can do to make a high quality video from it. There is pixelation throughout the whole video, from top to bottom in each of the frames. Horrible.. Just horrible. I don't know why Intel added the mpeg2 encoder in there when it is pure crap. H264/AVC and HEVC on the other hand are much better quality videos. Anyway.

Micro Center sells the i7-6700 CPU at an attractive price compared to some other stores http://www.microcenter.com/product/453910/Core_i7-6700_34GHz_LGA_1151_Boxed_Processor With a 65W TDP, it would fit in well with the other parts for an mini-ITX build similar to the one I posted. It comes with its own CPU cooler. Intel's stock coolers are relatively easy to install.

The i7-6700K CPU is better, but hotter, and costs more. It doesn't come with a CPU cooler. Buyers need to supply their own CPU cooler, which adds to the expense. Suitable third-party CPU coolers will be much larger than Intel's stock coolers, and will need to be chosen carefully when using a smallish case. While third party coolers are often more effective than Intel's stock coolers, they are usually more difficult to install.